Beware of increased funding in the fight against HIV/AIDS. ONE (Red)-Letter Day for 'The Beginning of the End of AIDS' by Alicia Powe 12/02/2011 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47912 Before anybody accuses me of not wanting to alleviate suffering let me get into some things that should be discussed before the government throws more tax dollars around. I’ll begin with two truisms: 1. When the United Nations is involved in any way everything ends with more funding for UN agencies. 2. International charity hustlers never miss a bet. Every health problem requires more money —— lots more money. Back in 2002, it was reported that Communist China was undergoing an AIDS epidemic. The numbers given may or may not have been true. I tend to distrust any reported numbers about AIDS because I always sense the UN's hand is shaking the can for more money. I suspected that Chicoms were fudging the numbers because of its forced abortion policies in its drive to achieve absolute population control. It did not seem logical to me that a government that murders children in the womb, as well as neglecting unwanted infants until they die of disease and starvation in state-run institutions will then turn around and claim it wants to do something humane about AIDS sufferers. I cite China specifically because there is no guarantee that some of America’s money going through the UN laundry will NOT end up funding China’s well-known abortion policies. More so in Third World countries. Americans can’t stop funding abortion with tax dollars in this country: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L2a9Sk8iLWo Sending tax dollars through Planned Parenthood is the way it is done here; so there is not a chance of stopping tax dollars earmarked for AIDS patients in Third World countries from going to abortion mills and people who perform abortions once UN charity hustlers get the money. The first thing to put in perspective about HIV/AIDS is the search for cures. Sexual contact is the most common way of transmitting AIDS. Years ago I suggested developing a pre-sex screening test as the best way to reverse the infection rate. Developing such a test may not be possible, but I never heard that anyone was trying —— with or without tax dollars. If a cure is not possible, then a way should be found to identify AIDS in a prospective partner before the sex act is performed. I’m trying to make a point here; so bear with me. For example: A salvia or patch test may turn out to be easier to develop than it is to find a cure. A piece of chemically-treated paper that would change color with salvia if a person is infected would be ideal. Something like that would certainly reduce the spread of AIDS dramatically. Another possible test could take the form of a patch test applied to the skin. I am not claiming that it would be easy to develop a test that everyone could use, but it’s worth investigating with research dollars. Consider this in relation to funding research for a pre-sex screening test that worked. Imagine HIV/AIDS spreading in the same ways bubonic plague and numerous other diseases are circulated. All of society’s political forces would move heaven and earth to isolate anyone that was infected; especially since passengers traveling on intercontinental aircraft could disseminate a disease around the globe in two days. Because AIDS is primarily spread by sexual activity the power structure in every country is not threatened; so a cure becomes unimportant. Any research into stopping, or reversing, the spread of AIDS with a viable screening test is even less important. Also, never underestimate the political power of dirty little moralists. You can bet that they see AIDS as punishment for heterosexual, and homosexual, activity; so they will block every attempt to develop a pre-sex screening test. I truly believe that dirty-minded moralists would like nothing better than to see AIDS kill off millions every year. Looking at the way the wars against sexually transmitted diseases is fought, I get the distinct impression that the people running society are more interested in stopping fornication than they are interested in stopping a sexually transmitted disease. Parenthetically, with all of the money the Hollywood crowd raises to fight AIDS, I have to wonder why they are not using their tremendous leverage to fund research in the direction I am suggesting? Next on the list is tainted blood supplies. Americans are best at dealing with the problem because of the large damage awards handed down against any institution or individual responsible for this tragic situation. Being best is not good enough. This blood transfusion method of transmitting AIDS should, and can, be eliminated —— not with more money, but with less money and a sight more accountability from the people who benefit the most from Medicare tax dollars. Doctors in countries that have full-blown socialized medicine do not have the same kind of political power that American doctors have. American doctors have the muscle to bring about change for the good of patients. Doctors under socialized medicine have infinitely more political power to conceal their shortcomings by way of government protection. Unless Hillarycare II is repealed, American doctors will end up powerless when it comes to helping their patients against the government's will. I don't expect much to happen under a system of socialized medicine in any country. If AIDS decreases so does the money socialized medicine demands to treat the disease. Charity hustlers are threatened by anything that would ultimately cut into their well-funded compassion by reducing the number of new sufferers. The big money in medicine is in treatment not cure. The healthcare business is no different than any other business that places the bottom line above all else. No businessperson willing reduces their customer base. Socialists, and socialized medicine in general, encourage treatment not cure. Incidentally, are legal immigrants coming to the U.S. tested for AIDS? Illegal aliens sure as hell aren't. Maybe that's another reason Socialists running the Democratic party like open borders. More infected Americans equals more tax dollars to fight the disease. Hell, our enemies don't need biological weapons; all they have to do is send a hundred thousand AIDS infected illegal immigrants our way every year. If Hillarycare II fails to bankrupt us, HIV/AIDS will kill us off in time. The deliberate failure in halting the spread of AIDS is another approach to population control, although that approach is difficult to prove. The only evidence available lies in the number and location of its sufferers, rather than in proof that cannot be denied.
